Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power. However, they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling to restrict or to dissolve coercive social institutions.

Libertarian came to mean an advocate or defender of liberty, especially in the political and social spheres, as early as 1796, when the London Packet printed on 12 February: "Lately marched out of the Prison at Bristol, 450 of the French Libertarians."[16] The word was again used in a political sense in 1802, in a short piece critiquing a poem by "the author of Gebir", and has since been used with this meaning.[17][18][19]

The use of the word libertarian to describe a new set of political positions has been traced to the French cognate, libertaire, coined in a letter French libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque wrote to mutualist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1857.[20][21] Déjacque also used the term for his anarchist publication Le Libertaire: Journal du Mouvement Social, which was printed from 9 June 1858 to 4 February 1861 in New York City.[22][23] In the mid-1890s, Sébastien Faure began publishing a new Le Libertaire while France's Third Republic enacted the lois scélérates ("villainous laws"), which banned anarchist publications in France. Libertarianism has frequently been used as a synonym for anarchism since this time.[24][25][26]

Although the word libertarian continues to be widely used to refer to socialists internationally, its meaning in the United States has deviated from its political origins.[27][28]Libertarianism in the United States has been described as conservative on economic issues and liberal on personal freedom[29] (for common meanings of conservative and liberal in the United States); it is also often associated with a foreign policy of non-interventionism.[30][31]

There is contention about whether right, left, and socialist libertarianism "represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme."[32] All libertarians begin with a conception of personal autonomy from which they argue in favor of civil liberties and a reduction or elimination of the state.

Critics such as Corey Robin describe right-libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionaryconservative ideology, united with more traditional conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations:[39]

Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty—or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force—the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.

Anarchism envisages freedom as a form of autonomy,[40] which Paul Goodman describes as, "the ability to initiate a task and do it one's own way, without orders from authorities who do not know the actual problem and the available means."[41] All anarchists oppose political and legal authority, but collectivist strains also oppose the economic authority of private property.[42] These social anarchists emphasize mutual aid, whereas individualist anarchists extoll individual sovereignty.[43]

Libertarians have been advocates and activists of civil liberties, including free love and free thought.[46][47] Advocates of free love viewed sexual freedom as a clear, direct expression of individual sovereignty. They particularly stressed women's rights, as most sexual laws discriminated against women: for example, marriage laws and anti-birth control measures.[48]

Free love appeared alongside anarcha-feminism and advocacy of LGBT rights. Anarcha-feminism developed as a synthesis of radical feminism and anarchism, and views patriarchy as a fundamental manifestation of compulsory government. It was inspired by the late-19th-century writings of early feminist anarchists such as Lucy Parsons, Emma Goldman, Voltairine de Cleyre and Virginia Bolten. Anarcha-feminists, like other radical feminists, criticise and advocate the abolition of traditional conceptions of family, education and gender roles. Free Society (1895–1897 as The Firebrand, 1897–1904 as Free Society) was an anarchist newspaper in the United States that staunchly advocated free love and women's rights, while criticizing "comstockery", the censorship of sexual information.[49] In recent times, anarchism has also voiced opinions and taken action around certain sex-related subjects such as pornography,[50]BDSM,[51] and the sex industry.[51]

Free thought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, in contrast with authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[52][53] In the United States, "free thought was an anti-Christian, anti-clerical movement, whose purpose was to make the individual politically and spiritually free to decide on religious matters. A number of contributors to Liberty were prominent figures in both free thought and anarchism. In 1901, Catalan anarchist and free-thinker Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia established "modern" or progressive schools in Barcelona in defiance of an educational system controlled by the Catholic Church.[54] Fiercely anti-clerical, Ferrer believed in "freedom in education," i.e., education free from the authority of the church and state.[55] The schools' stated goal was to "educate the working class in a rational, secular and non-coercive setting". Later in the 20th century Austrian freudo-marxistWilhelm Reich became a consistent propagandist for sexual freedom going as far as opening free sex-counselling clinics in Vienna for working-class patients[56] as well as coining the phrase "sexual revolution" in one of his books from the 1940s.[57] During the early 1970s, the English anarchist and pacifist Alex Comfort achieved international celebrity for writing the sex manuals The Joy of Sex and More Joy of Sex.

Most left-libertarians are anarchists and believe the state inherently violates personal autonomy: "As Robert Paul Wolff has argued, since 'the state is authority, the right to rule', anarchism which rejects the State is the only political doctrine consistent with autonomy in which the individual alone is the judge of his moral constraints."[42] Social anarchists believe the state defends private property, which they view as intrinsically harmful, while market-oriented left-libertarians argue that so-called free markets actually consist of economic privileges granted by the state. These latter libertarians advocate instead for freed markets, which are freed from these privileges.[58]

There is a debate amongst right-libertarians as to whether or not the state is legitimate: while anarcho-capitalists advocate its abolition, minarchists support minimal states, often referred to as night-watchman states. Libertarians take a skeptical view of government authority.[59][unreliable source?] Minarchists maintain that the state is necessary for the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. They believe the only legitimate governmental institutions are the military, police, and courts, though some expand this list to include fire departments, prisons, and the executive and legislative branches.[60] They justify the state on the grounds that it is the logical consequence of adhering to the non-aggression principle and argue that anarchism is immoral because it implies that the non-aggression principle is optional, that the enforcement of laws under anarchism is open to competition.[citation needed] Another common justification is that private defense agencies and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.[61]

Anarcho-capitalists argue that the state violates the non-aggression principle by its nature because governments use force against those who have not stolen or vandalized private property, assaulted anyone, or committed fraud.[62][63]Linda & Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government's citizenry can't desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.[64]

Right-libertarians maintain that unowned natural resources "may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes his labor with them, or merely claims them—without the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them." They believe that natural resources are originally unowned, and therefore, private parties may appropriate them at will without the consent of, or owing to, others.[65]

Left-libertarians believe that neither claiming nor mixing one's labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights,[66][67] and maintain that natural resources ought to be held in some egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[68]

Left-libertarians (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists, and left-wing market anarchists) argue in favor of socialist theories such as communism, syndicalism, and mutualism (see Anarchist economics). Daniel Guérin writes that "anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man. Anarchism is only one of the streams of socialist thought, that stream whose main components are concern for liberty and haste to abolish the State."[70]

Wage labour has long been compared by socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to slavery.[71][72][73][74] As a result, the term wage slavery is often utilised as a pejorative for wage labor.[75] Advocates of slavery looked upon the "comparative evils of Slave Society and of Free Society, of slavery to human Masters and slavery to Capital,"[76] and proceeded to argue that wage slavery was actually worse than chattel slavery.[77] Slavery apologists like George Fitzhugh contended that workers only accepted wage labour with the passage of time, as they became "familiarized and inattentive to the infected social atmosphere they continually inhale[d]."[76]

According to Noam Chomsky, analysis of the psychological implications of wage slavery goes back to the Enlightenment era. In his 1791 book On the Limits of State Action, classical liberal thinker Wilhelm von Humboldt explained how "whatever does not spring from a man's free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely with mechanical exactness" and so when the labourer works under external control, "we may admire what he does, but we despise what he is."[78] For Marxists, labour-as-commodity, which is how they regard wage labour,[79] provides an absolutely fundamental point of attack against capitalism.[80] "It can be persuasively argued," noted philosopher John Nelson, "that the conception of the worker's labour as a commodity confirms Marx's stigmatization of the wage system of private capitalism as 'wage-slavery;' that is, as an instrument of the capitalist's for reducing the worker's condition to that of a slave, if not below it."[81] That this objection is fundamental follows immediately from Marx's conclusion that wage labour is the very foundation of capitalism: "Without a class dependent on wages, the moment individuals confront each other as free persons, there can be no production of surplus value; without the production of surplus-value there can be no capitalist production, and hence no capital and no capitalist!"[82]

Paleolibertarianism is a variety of libertarianism developed by anarcho-capitalist theorists Murray Rothbard and Llewellyn Rockwell that combines conservative cultural values and social philosophy with a libertarian opposition to government intervention.

Paleoliberatrism is a controversal current due its connections to the tea party movement and alt-right. These movements are however united by an anti-Obama stance and liberal gun laws instead of further ideological overlaps. In the essay "Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement", Rothbard reflected on the ability of paleolibertarians to engage in an "outreach to rednecks" founded on social conservatism and radical libertarianism. He cited former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke and former U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy as models for the new movement.[83]

In Europe, EU-parlamentarian Janusz Korwin-Mikke supports both libertarian economics and anti-immigration and misogynic positions. One of Korwin-Mikke's idiosyncratic claims that caught public attention was him denying the basis for women's suffrage, as according to him most women were not interested in politics anyway and would more often vote for a welfare state.[84] He pointed out that in the top 100 chess players there is only one woman.[85] On 8 September 2015, Korwin-Mikke was giving a speech in European Parliament about the European migrant crisis, during which he described immigrants unwilling to work and only interested in welfare as "human garbage".[86]

Neoliberalism (neo-liberalism) emerged in the era following World War II during which social liberalism and Keynesianism were the dominant ideologies in the Western world. It was led by economists such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman,[96] who advocated the reduction of the state and a return to classical liberalism. It did however accept some aspects of social liberalism, such as some degree of welfare provision by the state, but on a greatly reduced scale. Hayek and Friedman used the term classical liberalism to refer to their ideas; however, others use the term to refer to all liberalism before the 20th century, not to designate any particular set of political views, and therefore see all modern developments as being, by definition, not classical.[97] As a result, the term neoliberalism has often been used as an alternative, however this term has developed negative connotations and is now usually only used as a pejorative.

Anarcho-capitalism (also referred to as free-market anarchism,[98] market anarchism,[99] and private-property anarchism[100]) is a political philosophy which advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.[101][102] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation, and money would be privately and competitively provided in an open market.[103] Therefore, personal and economic activities under anarcho-capitalism would be regulated by privately run law rather than through politics.[104]

The most well-known version of anarcho-capitalism was formulated in the mid-20th century by Austrian School economist and libertarian Murray Rothbard. Murray coined the term and is widely regarded as its founder. He combined the free-market approach from the Austrian School of economics (classical liberalism) with the human rights views and a rejection of the state he learned from 19th-century American individualist anarchists such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker (though he rejected the anarchists' anti-capitalism, along with the labor theory of value and the normative implications they derived from it).[note 1][105] In Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism, there would first be the implementation of a mutually agreed-upon libertarian "legal code which would be generally accepted, and which the courts would pledge themselves to follow."[106] This legal code would recognize sovereignty of the individual and the principle of non-aggression.

Contemporary left-libertarian scholars such as Hillel Steiner,[107] Peter Vallentyne,[108] Philippe Van Parijs,[109] Michael Otsuka,[110] and David Ellerman[111][112] root an economic egalitarianism in the classical liberal concepts of self-ownership and land appropriation, combined with geoist or physiocratic views regarding the ownership of land and natural resources (e.g. those of John Locke and Henry George).[note 2] They hold that it is illegitimate for anyone to claim private ownership of natural resources to the detriment of others.[113][note 3][note 4] Instead, unappropriated natural resources are either unowned or owned in common, and private appropriation is only legitimate if everyone can appropriate an equal amount or if private appropriation is taxed to compensate those who are excluded from natural resources. Most left-libertarians support some form of income redistribution on the grounds of a claim by each individual to be entitled to an equal share of natural resources.[114] A number of left-libertarians of this school argue for the desirability of some state social welfare programs.[115][116]

Geolibertarianism is a political movement and ideology that synthesizes libertarianism and geoist theory, traditionally known as Georgism.[117][118]

Geolibertarians are advocates of geoism, which is the position that all natural resources, including land, are common assets which all individuals have an equal right to access; therefore, individuals must pay rent to the community if they claim land as their private property. Rent need not be paid for the mere use of land, but only for the right to exclude others from that land, and for the protection of one's title by government. They simultaneously agree with the right-libertarian position that each individual has an exclusive right to the fruits of his or her labor as their private property, as opposed to this product being owned collectively by society or the community, and that "one's labor, wages, and the products of labor" should not be taxed. As with traditional libertarians, they advocate "full civil liberties, with no crimes unless there are victims who have been invaded."[117] Geolibertarians generally advocate distributing the land rent to the community via a land value tax, as proposed by Henry George and others before him. For this reason, they are often called "single taxers". Fred E. Foldvary coined the word "geo-libertarianism" in an article so titled in Land and Liberty.[119] In the case of geoanarchism, a proposed voluntaryist form of geolibertarianism as described by Foldvary, rent would be collected by private associations with the opportunity to secede from a geocommunity (and not receive the geocommunity's services) if desired.[120]

Elements of libertarianism can be traced as far back as the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu and the higher-law concepts of the Greeks and the Israelites.[155][156] In 17th-century England, libertarian ideas began to take modern form in the writings of the Levellers and John Locke. In the middle of that century, opponents of royal power began to be called Whigs, or sometimes simply "opposition" or "country" (as opposed to Court) writers.[157]

During the 18th century, classical liberal ideas flourished in Europe and North America.[158][159] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by classical liberal ideas.[160] For libertarian philosopher Roderick T. Long, both libertarian socialists and libertarian capitalists "share a common—or at least an overlapping intellectual ancestry—... both claim the seventeenth century English Levellers and the eighteenth century French encyclopedists among their ideological forebears; and (also)... usually share an admiration for Thomas Jefferson[161][162][163] and Thomas Paine".[164]

John Locke greatly influenced both libertarianism and the modern world in his writings published before and after the English Revolution of 1688, especially A Letter Concerning Toleration (1667), Two Treatises of Government (1689) and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). In the latter he established the basis of liberal political theory: that people's rights existed before government; that the purpose of government is to protect personal and property rights; that people may dissolve governments that do not do so; and that representative government is the best form to protect rights.[165] The United States Declaration of Independence was inspired by Locke in its statement: "to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."[166] Nevertheless scholar Ellen Meiksins Wood says that "there are doctrines of individualism that are opposed to Lockean individualism... and non-Lockean individualism may encompass socialism".[167]

According to Murray Rothbard, the libertarian creed emerged from the classical liberal challenges to an "absolute central State and a king ruling by divine right on top of an older, restrictive web of feudal land monopolies and urban guild controls and restrictions", the mercantilism of a bureaucratic warfaring state allied with privileged merchants. The object of classical liberals was individual liberty in the economy, in personal freedoms and civil liberty, separation of state and religion, and peace as an alternative to imperial aggrandizement. He cites Locke's contemporaries, the Levellers, who held similar views. Also influential were the English "Cato's Letters" during the early 1700s, reprinted eagerly by American colonists who already were free of European aristocracy and feudal land monopolies.[166]

In January of 1776, only two years after coming to America from England, Thomas Paine published his pamphlet "Common Sense" calling for independence for the colonies.[168] Paine promoted classical liberal ideas in clear, concise language that allowed the general public to understand the debates among the political elites.[169]Common Sense was immensely popular in disseminating these ideas,[170] selling hundreds of thousands of copies.[171] Paine later would write the Rights of Man and The Age of Reason and participate in the French Revolution.[168] Paine's theory of property showed a "libertarian concern" with the redistribution of resources.[172]

In 1793, William Godwin wrote a libertarian philosophical treatise, Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Morals and Happiness, which criticized ideas of human rights and of society by contract based on vague promises. He took classical liberalism to its logical anarchic conclusion by rejecting all political institutions, law, government, and apparatus of coercion, as well as all political protest and insurrection. Instead of institutionalized justice he proposed that people influence one and other to moral goodness through informal reasoned persuasion, including in the associations they joined, and that this would facilitate human happiness.[173][174]

Modern anarchism sprang from the secular or religious thought of the Enlightenment, particularly Jean-Jacques Rousseau's arguments for the moral centrality of freedom.[175]

As part of the political turmoil of the 1790s in the wake of the French Revolution, William Godwin developed the first expression of modern anarchist thought.[176][177] Godwin was, according to Peter Kropotkin, "the first to formulate the political and economical conceptions of anarchism, even though he did not give that name to the ideas developed in his work",[178] while Godwin attached his anarchist ideas to an early Edmund Burke.[179]

Godwin is generally regarded as the founder of the school of thought known as 'philosophical anarchism'. He argued in Political Justice (1793)[177][180] that government has an inherently malevolent influence on society, and that it perpetuates dependency and ignorance. He thought that the spread of the use of reason to the masses would eventually cause government to wither away as an unnecessary force. Although he did not accord the state with moral legitimacy, he was against the use of revolutionary tactics for removing the government from power. Rather, he advocated for its replacement through a process of peaceful evolution.[177][181]

His aversion to the imposition of a rules-based society led him to denounce, as a manifestation of the people's "mental enslavement", the foundations of law, property rights and even the institution of marriage. He considered the basic foundations of society as constraining the natural development of individuals to use their powers of reasoning to arrive at a mutually beneficial method of social organization. In each case, government and its institutions are shown to constrain the development of our capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of private judgment.

In France, various anarchist currents were present during the Revolutionary period, with some revolutionaries using the term anarchiste in a positive light as early as September 1793.[182] The enragés opposed revolutionary government as a contradiction in terms. Denouncing the Jacobin dictatorship, Jean Varlet wrote in 1794 that "government and revolution are incompatible, unless the people wishes to set its constituted authorities in permanent insurrection against itself."[183] In his "Manifesto of the Equals," Sylvain Maréchal looked forward to the disappearance, once and for all, of "the revolting distinction between rich and poor, of great and small, of masters and valets, of governors and governed."[183]

Libertarian socialism, libertarian communism and libertarian Marxism are all phrases which activists with a variety of perspectives have applied to their views.[184] Anarchist communist philosopher Joseph Déjacque was the first person to describe himself as a libertarian.[185] Unlike mutualist anarchist philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, he argued that, "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature."[186][187] According to anarchist historian Max Nettlau, the first use of the term libertarian communism was in November 1880, when a French anarchist congress employed it to more clearly identify its doctrines.[188] The French anarchist journalist Sébastien Faure started the weekly paper Le Libertaire (The Libertarian) in 1895.[189]

In the 1920s and 1930s, with the rise of fascism in Europe, anarchists began to fight fascists in Italy[224] in France during the February 1934 riots,[225] and in Spain where the CNT (Confederación Nacional del Trabajo) boycott of elections led to a right-wing victory and its later participation in voting in 1936 helped bring the popular front back to power. This led to a ruling class attempted coup and the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939).[226] Gruppo Comunista Anarchico di Firenze held that the during early twentieth century, the terms libertarian communism and anarchist communism became synonymous within the international anarchist movement as a result of the close connection they had in Spain (see Anarchism in Spain) (with libertarian communism becoming the prevalent term).[227]

Murray Bookchin wrote that the Spanish libertarian movement of the mid-1930s was unique because its workers' control and collectives—which came out of a three-generation "massive libertarian movement"—divided the republican camp and challenged the Marxists. Urban anarchists' created libertarian communist forms of organization which evolved into the CNT, a syndicalist union providing the infrastructure for a libertarian society. Also formed were local bodies to administer of social and economic life on a decentralized libertarian basis. Much of the infrastructure was destroyed during the 1930s Spanish Civil War against authoritarian and fascist forces.[228] The Iberian Federation of Libertarian Youth[229] (FIJL, Spanish: Federación Ibérica de Juventudes Libertarias), sometimes abbreviated as Libertarian Youth (Juventudes Libertarias), was a libertarian socialist[230] organisation created in 1932 in Madrid.[231] In February 1937 the FIJL organised a plenum of regional organisations (second congress of FIJL). In October 1938, from the 16th through the 30th in Barcelona, the FIJL participated in a national plenum of the libertarian movement, also attended by members of the CNT and the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI).[232] The FIJL exists until today. When the republican forces lost the Spanish Civil War, the city of Madrid was turned over to the francoist forces in 1939 by the last non-francoist mayor of the city, the anarchist Melchor Rodríguez García.[233] During autumn of 1931 the "Manifesto of the 30" was published by militants of the anarchist trade union CNT and among those who signed it there was the CNT General Secretary (1922–1923) Joan Peiro, Angel Pestaña CNT (General Secretary in 1929), and Juan Lopez Sanchez. They were called treintismo and they were calling for "Libertarian possibilism" which advocated achieving libertarian socialist ends with participation inside structures of contemporary parliamentary democracy.[234] In 1932 they establish the Syndicalist Party which participates in the 1936 spanish general elections and proceed to be a part of the leftist coalition of parties known as the Popular Front obtaining 2 congressmen (Pestaña and Benito Pabon). In 1938 Horacio Prieto, general secretary of the CNT, proposes that the Iberian Anarchist Federation transforms itself into a "Libertarian Socialist Party" and that it participates in the national elections.[235]

In 1969, French platformist anarcho-communist Daniel Guérin published an essay in 1969 called "Libertarian Marxism?" in which he dealt with the debate between Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin at the First International and afterwards suggested that "Libertarian marxism rejects determinism and fatalism, giving the greater place to individual will, intuition, imagination, reflex speeds, and to the deep instincts of the masses, which are more far-seeing in hours of crisis than the reasonings of the 'elites'; libertarian marxism thinks of the effects of surprise, provocation and boldness, refuses to be cluttered and paralysed by a heavy 'scientific' apparatus, doesn't equivocate or bluff, and guards itself from adventurism as much as from fear of the unknown."[247] Libertarian Marxist currents often draw from Marx and Engels' later works, specifically the Grundrisse and The Civil War in France.[248] They emphasize the Marxist belief in the ability of the working class to forge its own destiny without the need for a revolutionary party or state.[249] Libertarian Marxism includes such currents as council communism, left communism, Socialisme ou BarbarieLettrism/Situationism and operaismo/autonomism, and New Left.[250][unreliable source?] In the US from 1970 to 1981 there existed the publication Root & Branch[251] which had as a subtitle "A Libertarian Marxist Journal".[252] In 1974 the Libertarian Communism journal was started in the United Kingdom by a group inside the Socialist Party of Great Britain.[253] In 1986 the anarcho-syndicalist Sam Dolgoff started and led the publication Libertarian Labor Review in the United States[254] which decided to rename itself as Anarcho-Syndicalist Review in order to avoid confusion with right-libertarian views.[255]

The indigenous anarchist tradition in the United States was largely individualist.[256] In 1825, Josiah Warren became aware of the social system of utopian socialistRobert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony.[257] When this group failed to come to an agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren "sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana."[258] Warren termed the phrase "cost the limit of price"[259] and "proposed a system to pay people with certificates indicating how many hours of work they did. They could exchange the notes at local time stores for goods that took the same amount of time to produce."[260] He put his theories to the test by establishing an experimental labor-for-labor store called the Cincinnati Time Store where trade was facilitated by labor notes. The store proved successful and operated for three years, after which it was closed so that Warren could pursue establishing colonies based on mutualism, including Utopia and Modern Times. "After New Harmony failed, Warren shifted his ideological loyalties from socialism to anarchism (which was no great leap, given that Owen's socialism had been predicated on Godwin's anarchism)."[261] Josiah Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist,[260] and the four-page weekly paper he edited during 1833, The Peaceful Revolutionist, was the first anarchist periodical published,[200] an enterprise for which he built his own printing press, cast his own type, and made his own printing plates.[200]

Catalan historian Xavier Diez reports that the intentional communal experiments pioneered by Warren were influential in European individualist anarchists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries such as Émile Armand and the intentional communities started by them.[262] Warren said that Stephen Pearl Andrews, individualist anarchist and close associate, wrote the most lucid and complete exposition of Warren's own theories in The Science of Society, published in 1852.[263] Andrews was formerly associated with the Fourierist movement, but converted to radical individualism after becoming acquainted with the work of Warren. Like Warren, he held the principle of "individual sovereignty" as being of paramount importance. Contemporary American anarchist Hakim Bey reports:

Steven Pearl Andrews... was not a fourierist, but he lived through the brief craze for phalansteries in America and adopted a lot of fourierist principles and practices... a maker of worlds out of words. He syncretized abolitionism in the United States, free love, spiritual universalism, Warren, and Fourier into a grand utopian scheme he called the Universal Pantarchy... He was instrumental in founding several 'intentional communities,' including the 'Brownstone Utopia' on 14th St. in New York, and 'Modern Times' in Brentwood, Long Island. The latter became as famous as the best-known fourierist communes (Brook Farm in Massachusetts & the North American Phalanx in New Jersey)—in fact, Modern Times became downright notorious (for 'Free Love') and finally foundered under a wave of scandalous publicity. Andrews (and Victoria Woodhull) were members of the infamous Section 12 of the 1st International, expelled by Marx for its anarchist, feminist, and spiritualist tendencies.[264]

For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, "It is apparent... that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews. William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form."[265] William Batchelder Greene was a 19th-century mutualist individualist anarchist, Unitarian minister, soldier and promoter of free banking in the United States. Greene is best known for the works Mutual Banking, which proposed an interest-free banking system, and Transcendentalism, a critique of the New England philosophical school. After 1850, he became active in labor reform.[265] "He was elected vice-president of the New England Labor Reform League, the majority of the members holding to Proudhon's scheme of mutual banking, and in 1869 president of the Massachusetts Labor Union."[265] He then published Socialistic, Mutualistic, and Financial Fragments (1875).[265] He saw mutualism as the synthesis of "liberty and order."[265] His "associationism... is checked by individualism... 'Mind your own business,' 'Judge not that ye be not judged.' Over matters which are purely personal, as for example, moral conduct, the individual is sovereign, as well as over that which he himself produces. For this reason he demands 'mutuality' in marriage—the equal right of a woman to her own personal freedom and property."[265]

Poet, naturalist, and transcendentalistHenry David Thoreau was an important early influence in individualist anarchist thought in the United States and Europe. He is best known for his book Walden, a reflection upon simple living in natural surroundings, and his essay Civil Disobedience (Resistance to Civil Government), an argument for individual resistance to civil government in moral opposition to an unjust state. In Walden, Thoreau advocates simple living and self-sufficiency among natural surroundings in resistance to the advancement of industrial civilization.[266]Civil Disobedience, first published in 1849, argues that people should not permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that people have a duty to avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. These works influenced green anarchism, anarcho-primitivism, and anarcho-pacifism,[267] as well as figures including Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Martin Buber and Leo Tolstoy.[267] "Many have seen in Thoreau one of the precursors of ecologism and anarcho-primitivism represented today in John Zerzan. For George Woodcock this attitude can be also motivated by certain idea of resistance to progress and of rejection of the growing materialism which is the nature of American society in the mid-19th century."[266] John Zerzan included Thoreau's "Excursions" in his edited compilation of anti-civilization writings, Against Civilization: Readings and Reflections.[268] Individualist anarchists such as Thoreau,[269][270] do not speak of economics but simply the right of disunion from the state, and foresee the gradual elimination of the state through social evolution. Agorist author J. Neil Schulman cites Thoreau as a primary inspiration. [271]

Economists since Adam Smith have known that—unlike other taxes—a land value tax would not cause economic inefficiency.[272] It would be a progressive tax[273]—primarily paid by the wealthy—and increase wages, reduce economic inequality, remove incentives to misuse real estate, and reduce the vulnerability that economies face from credit and property bubbles.[274][275] Early proponents of this view include Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, and Hugo Grotius,[113] but the concept was widely popularized by the economist and social reformer Henry George.[276] George believed that people ought to own the fruits of their labor and the value of the improvements they make. Thus, he was opposed to income taxes, sales taxes, taxes on improvements, and all other taxes on production, labor, trade, or commerce. George was among the staunchest defenders of free markets, and his book Protection or Free Trade was read into the U.S. Congressional Record.[277] Yet he did support direct management of natural monopolies as a last resort, such as right-of-way monopolies necessary for railroads. George advocated for elimination of intellectual property arrangements in favor of government sponsored prizes for inventors.[278][not in citation given] Early followers of George's philosophy called themselves Single Taxers because they believed that the only legitimate, broad-based tax was land rent. The term Georgism was coined later, though some modern proponents prefer the term geoism instead,[279] leaving the meaning of geo (earth, in Greek) deliberately ambiguous. The terms Earth Sharing,[280]geonomics,[281] and geolibertarianism[282] are used by some Georgists to represent a difference of emphasis, or real differences about how land rent should be spent, but all agree that land rent should be recovered from its private owners.

Individualist anarchism found in the United States an important space for discussion and development within the group known as the "Boston anarchists."[283] Even among the 19th-century American individualists there was no monolithic doctrine, and they disagreed amongst each other on various issues including intellectual property rights and possession versus property in land.[284][285][286] Some Boston anarchists, including Benjamin Tucker, identified as socialists, which in the 19th century was often used in the sense of a commitment to improving conditions of the working class (i.e. "the labor problem");[287] Lysander Spooner, besides his individualist anarchist activism, was also an anti-slavery activist and member of the First International.[288] Tucker argued that the elimination of what he called "the four monopolies"—the land monopoly, the money and banking monopoly, the monopoly powers conferred by patents, and the quasi-monopolistic effects of tariffs—would undermine the power of the wealthy and big business, making possible widespread property ownership and higher incomes for ordinary people, while minimizing the power of would-be bosses and achieving socialist goals without state action. Tucker's anarchist periodical, Liberty, was published from August 1881 to April 1908. The publication, emblazoned with Proudhon's quote that liberty is "Not the Daughter But the Mother of Order," was instrumental in developing and formalizing the individualist anarchist philosophy through publishing essays and serving as a forum for debate. Contributors included Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Auberon Herbert, Dyer Lum, Joshua K. Ingalls, John Henry Mackay, Victor Yarros, Wordsworth Donisthorpe, James L. Walker, J. William Lloyd, Florence Finch Kelly, Voltairine de Cleyre, Steven T. Byington, John Beverley Robinson, Jo Labadie, Lillian Harman, and Henry Appleton.[289] Later, Tucker and others abandoned their traditional support of natural rights and converted to an egoism modeled upon the philosophy of Max Stirner.[285] A number of natural rights proponents stopped contributing in protest and, "[t]hereafter, Liberty championed egoism, although its general content did not change significantly."[290] Several publications "were undoubtedly influenced by Liberty's presentation of egoism. They included: I published by C.L. Swartz, edited by W.E. Gordak and J.W. Lloyd (all associates of Liberty); The Ego and The Egoist, both of which were edited by Edward H. Fulton. Among the egoist papers that Tucker followed were the German Der Eigene, edited by Adolf Brand, and The Eagle and The Serpent, issued from London. The latter, the most prominent English-language egoist journal, was published from 1898 to 1900 with the subtitle 'A Journal of Egoistic Philosophy and Sociology'".[290]

By around the start of the 20th century, the heyday of individualist anarchism had passed.[291]H. L. Mencken and Albert Jay Nock were the first prominent figures in the United States to describe themselves as libertarians;[292] they believed Franklin D. Roosevelt had co-opted the word liberal for his New Deal policies, which they opposed, and used libertarian to signify their allegiance to individualism.[citation needed] In 1914, Nock joined the staff of The Nation magazine, which at the time was supportive of liberal capitalism. A lifelong admirer of Henry George, Nock went on to become co-editor of The Freeman from 1920 to 1924, a publication initially conceived as a vehicle for the single tax movement, financed by the wealthy wife of the magazine's other editor, Francis Neilson.[293] Critic H.L. Mencken wrote that "His editorials during the three brief years of the Freeman set a mark that no other man of his trade has ever quite managed to reach. They were well-informed and sometimes even learned, but there was never the slightest trace of pedantry in them."[294]

Executive Vice-President of the Cato Institute, David Boaz, writes "In 1943, at one of the lowest points for liberty and humanity in history, three remarkable women published books that could be said to have given birth to the modern libertarian movement."[295]Isabel Paterson's The God of the Machine, Rose Wilder Lane's The Discovery of Freedom, and Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead each promoted individualism and capitalism. None of the three used the term libertarianism to describe their beliefs, and Rand specifically rejected the label, criticizing the burgeoning American libertarian movement as the "hippies of the right."[296] Rand's own philosophy, Objectivism, is notedly similar to libertarianism, and she accused libertarians of plagiarizing her ideas.[296] Rand stated that:

All kinds of people today call themselves "libertarians," especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies who are anarchists instead of leftist collectivists; but anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism. That's worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It's a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. Anarchists are the scum of the intellectual world of the Left, which has given them up. So the Right picks up another leftist discard. That's the libertarian movement.[297]

Austrian school economist Murray Rothbard was initially an enthusiastic partisan of the Old Right, particularly because of its general opposition to war and imperialism,[303] but long embraced a reading of American history that emphasized the role of elite privilege in shaping legal and political institutions. He was part of Ayn Rand's circle for a brief period, but later harshly criticized Objectivism.[304] He praised Rand's Atlas Shrugged and wrote that she "introduced me to the whole field of natural rights and natural law philosophy," prompting him to learn "the glorious natural rights tradition."[305](pp121, 132–34) He soon broke with Rand over various differences, including his defense of anarchism. Rothbard was influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists[306] and sought to meld their advocacy of free markets and private defense with the principles of Austrian economics.[307] This new philosophy he called anarcho-capitalism.

Karl Hess, a speechwriter for Barry Goldwater and primary author of the Republican Party's 1960 and 1964 platforms, became disillusioned with traditional politics following the 1964 presidential campaign in which Goldwater lost to Lyndon Johnson. He parted with the Republicans altogether after being rejected for employment with the party, and began work as a heavy-duty welder. Hess began reading American anarchists largely due to the recommendations of his friend Murray Rothbard, and said that, upon reading the works of communist anarchist Emma Goldman, he discovered that anarchists believed everything he had hoped the Republican Party would represent. For Hess, Goldman was the source for the best and most essential theories of Ayn Rand without any of the "crazy solipsism that Rand was so fond of."[308] Hess and Rothbard founded the journal Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought, which was published from 1965 to 1968, with George Resch and Leonard P. Liggio. In 1969, they edited The Libertarian Forum 1969, which Hess left in 1971. Hess eventually put his focus on the small scale, stating that "Society is: people together making culture." He deemed two of his cardinal social principles to be "opposition to central political authority" and "concern for people as individuals." His rejection of standard American party politics was reflected in a lecture he gave during which he said, "The Democrats or liberals think that everybody is stupid and therefore they need somebody... to tell them how to behave themselves. The Republicans think everybody is lazy..."[309]

The Vietnam War split the uneasy alliance between growing numbers of American libertarians and conservatives who believed in limiting liberty to uphold moral virtues. Libertarians opposed to the war joined the draft resistance and peace movements, as well as organizations such as Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In 1969 and 1970, Hess joined with others, including Murray Rothbard, Robert LeFevre, Dana Rohrabacher, Samuel Edward Konkin III, and former SDS leader Carl Oglesby to speak at two "left-right" conferences which brought together activists from both the Old Right and the New Left in what was emerging as a nascent libertarian movement.[310] As part of his effort to unite right and left-libertarianism, Hess would join the SDS as well as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), of which he explained, "We used to have a labor movement in this country, until I.W.W. leaders were killed or imprisoned. You could tell labor unions had become captive when business and government began to praise them. They're destroying the militant black leaders the same way now. If the slaughter continues, before long liberals will be asking, 'What happened to the blacks? Why aren't they militant anymore?'"[311] Rothbard ultimately broke with the left, allying himself instead with the burgeoning paleoconservative movement.[312] He criticized the tendency of these left-libertarians to appeal to "'free spirits,' to people who don't want to push other people around, and who don't want to be pushed around themselves" in contrast to "the bulk of Americans," who "might well be tight-assed conformists, who want to stamp out drugs in their vicinity, kick out people with strange dress habits, etc."[313] This left-libertarian tradition has been carried to the present day by Samuel Edward Konkin III's agorists, contemporary mutualists such as Kevin Carson and Roderick T. Long, and other left-wing market anarchists.[314]

In 1971, a small group of Americans led by David Nolan formed the US Libertarian Party,[315] which has run a presidential candidate every election year since 1972. Other libertarian organizations, such as the Center for Libertarian Studies and the Cato Institute, were also formed in the 1970s.[316] Philosopher John Hospers, a one-time member of Rand's inner circle, proposed a non-initiation of force principle to unite both groups; this statement later became a required "pledge" for candidates of the Libertarian Party, and Hospers became its first presidential candidate in 1972.[citation needed] In the 1980s, Hess joined the Libertarian Party and served as editor of its newspaper from 1986 to 1990.

In the early 1970s, Rothbard wrote that "One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, 'our side,' had captured a crucial word from the enemy... 'Libertarians'... had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over..."[319] Since the resurgence of neoliberalism in the 1970s, this modern American libertarianism has spread beyond North America via think tanks and political parties.[320][321]

A surge of popular interest in libertarian socialism occurred in western nations during the 1960s and 1970s.[322] Anarchism was influential in the Counterculture of the 1960s[323][324][325] and anarchists actively participated in the late sixties students and workers revolts.[326] In 1968 in Carrara, Italy the International of Anarchist Federations was founded during an international anarchist conference held there in 1968 by the three existing European federations of France, the Italian and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as well as the Bulgarian federation in French exile.[238][327] The uprisings of May 1968 also led to a small resurgence of interest in left communist ideas. Various small left communist groups emerged around the world, predominantly in the leading capitalist countries. A series of conferences of the communist left began in 1976, with the aim of promoting international and cross-tendency discussion, but these petered out in the 1980s without having increased the profile of the movement or its unity of ideas.[328]Left communist groups existing today include the International Communist Party, International Communist Current and the Internationalist Communist Tendency. The housing and employment crisis in most of Western Europe led to the formation of communes and squatter movements like that of Barcelona, Spain. In Denmark, squatters occupied a disused military base and declared the Freetown Christiania, an autonomous haven in central Copenhagen.

Around the turn of the 21st century, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of the anti-war, anti-capitalist, and anti-globalisation movements.[329] Anarchists became known for their involvement in protests against the meetings of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Group of Eight, and the World Economic Forum. Some anarchist factions at these protests engaged in rioting, property destruction, and violent confrontations with police. These actions were precipitated by ad hoc, leaderless, anonymous cadres known as black blocs; other organisational tactics pioneered in this time include security culture, affinity groups and the use of decentralised technologies such as the internet.[329] A significant event of this period was the confrontations at WTO conference in Seattle in 1999.[329] For English anarchist scholar Simon Critchley "contemporary anarchism can be seen as a powerful critique of the pseudo-libertarianism of contemporary neo-liberalism...One might say that contemporary anarchism is about responsibility, whether sexual, ecological or socio-economic; it flows from an experience of conscience about the manifold ways in which the West ravages the rest; it is an ethical outrage at the yawning inequality, impoverishment and disenfranchisment that is so palpable locally and globally."[330] This might also have been motivated by "the collapse of ‘really existing socialism’ and the capitulation to neo-liberalism of Western social democracy."[331]

Former U.S. Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, a self-described libertarian, is one of the most popular contemporary libertarians.

In the United States, polls (circa 2006) find that the views and voting habits of between 10 and 20 percent (and increasing) of voting age Americans may be classified as "fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or libertarian."[332][333] This is based on pollsters and researchers defining libertarian views as fiscally conservative and socially liberal (based on the common US meanings of the terms) and against government intervention in economic affairs, and for expansion of personal freedoms.[332] Through 20 polls on this topic spanning 13 years, Gallup found that voters who are libertarian on the political spectrum ranged from 17–23% of the US electorate.[334] However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have no idea what the word means.[335]

2009 saw the rise of the Tea Party movement, an American political movement known for advocating a reduction in the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit by reducing U.S. government spending and taxes, which had a significant libertarian component[336] despite having contrasts with libertarian values and views in some areas, such as nationalism, free trade, social issues, and immigration.[337] A 2011 Reason-Rupe poll found that among those who self-identified as Tea Party supporters, 41 percent leaned libertarian and 59 percent, socially conservative.[338] The movement, named after the Boston Tea Party, also contains conservative[339] and populist elements,[340] and has sponsored multiple protests and supported various political candidates since 2009. Tea Party activities have declined since 2010 with the number of chapters across the country slipping from about 1,000 to 600.[341][342] Mostly, Tea Party organizations are said to have shifted away from national demonstrations to local issues.[341] Following the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's 2012 vice-presidential running mate, the New York Times declared that Tea Party lawmakers are no longer a fringe of the conservative coalition, but now "indisputably at the core of the modern Republican Party."[343]

A number of countries have libertarian parties that run candidates for political office. In the United States, the Libertarian Party was formed in 1972 and is the third largest[351][352] American political party, with over 370,000 registered voters in the 35 states that allow registration as a Libertarian[353] and has hundreds of party candidates elected or appointed to public office.[354]

Criticism of libertarianism includes ethical, economic, environmental, and pragmatic concerns. It has also been argued[by whom?] that laissez-faire capitalism does not necessarily produce the best or most efficient outcome, nor does its policy of deregulation prevent the abuse of natural resources. Furthermore, libertarianism has been criticized as utopian due to the lack of any such societies today.

Libertarianism, particularly the right wing and free market variant of the ideology, has also been criticized by author Michael Lind as being incompatible with democracy and apologetic towards autocracy.[356]

John Donahue argues that if political power were radically shifted to local authorities, parochial local interests would predominate at the expense of the whole, and that this would exacerbate current problems with collective action.[357]

^Miller (1987). p. 290. "A student and disciple of the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, Rothbard combined the laissez-faire economics of his teacher with the absolutist views of human rights and rejection of the state he had absorbed from studying the individualist American anarchists of the 19th century such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker."

^Scholars representing this school of left-libertarianism often understand their position in contrast to other libertarians who maintain that there are no fair share constraints on use or appropriation that individuals have the power to appropriate unowned things by claiming them (usually by mixing their labor with them), and deny any other conditions or considerations are relevant, and that there is no justification for the state to redistribute resources to the needy or to overcome market failures. Left-libertarians of the Carson–Long school (called left-wing market anarchists), referenced below, typically endorse the labor-based property rights Steiner–Vallentyne left-libertarians reject, but hold that implementing such rights would have radical rather than conservative consequences.

^Kymlicka, Will (2005). "libertarianism, left-." The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. In Honderich, Ted. New York: Oxford University Press. "[left-libertarians maintain that] the world's natural resources were initially unowned, or belonged equally to all, and it is illegitimate for anyone to claim exclusive private ownership of these resources to the detriment of others. Such private appropriation is legitimate only if everyone can appropriate an equal amount, or if those who appropriate more are taxed to compensate those who are thereby excluded from what was once common property."

^Some left-libertarians of the Steiner–Vallentyne type support some form of income redistribution on the grounds of a claim by each individual to be entitled to an equal share of natural resources:

^Boaz, David (January 30, 2009). "Libertarianism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2017-02-21. ...libertarianism, political philosophy that takes individual liberty to be the primary political value.

^Woodcock, George (2004). Anarchism: A History Of Libertarian Ideas And Movements. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press. p. 16. ISBN9781551116297. for the very nature of the libertarian attitude—its rejection of dogma, its deliberate avoidance of rigidly systematic theory, and, above all, its stress on extreme freedom of choice and on the primacy of the individual judgment

^Vallentyne, Peter; van der Vossen, Bas (5 September 2002). "Libertarianism". In Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved 22 February 2017. ...in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as 'left-libertarianism'. Both endorse full self-ownership...

^Hussain, Syed B. (2004). Encyclopedia of Capitalism. Vol. II : H-R. New York: Facts on File Inc. p. 492. ISBN0816052247. In the modern world, political ideologies are largely defined by their attitude towards capitalism. Marxists want to overthrow it, liberals to curtail it extensively, conservatives to curtail it moderately. Those who maintain that capitalism is a excellent economic system, unfairly maligned, with little or no need for corrective government policy, are generally known as libertarians.

^Long, Joseph.W (1996). "Toward a Libertarian Theory of Class." Social Philosophy and Policy. 15:2 p. 310. "When I speak of 'libertarianism'... I mean all three of these very different movements. It might be protested that LibCap, LibSoc and LibPop are too different from one another to be treated as aspects of a single point of view. But they do share a common—or at least an overlapping—intellectual ancestry."

^Carlson, Jennifer D. (2012). "Libertarianism". In Miller, Wilburn R., ed. The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America. London: Sage Publications. p. 1007. ISBN1412988764. "There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and left-libertarianism ... socialist libertarians ... advocate for the simultaneous abolition of both government and capitalism."

^Kropotkin, Petr (1927). Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings. Courier Dover Publications. p. 150. ISBN9780486119861. It attacks not only capital, but also the main sources of the power of capitalism: law, authority, and the State

^Vallentyne, Peter (March 2009). "Libertarianism". In Edward N. Zalta. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2009 ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Retrieved 2010-03-05. Libertarianism is committed to full self-ownership. A distinction can be made, however, between right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism, depending on the stance taken on how natural resources can be owned

^Caplan, Bryan (2008). "Anarchism". In Hamowy, Ronald. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 10–13. ISBN978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN2008009151. OCLC750831024. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n7. Libertarianism puts severe limits on morally permissible government action. If one takes its strictures seriously, does libertarianism require the abolition of government, logically reducing the position to anarchism? Robert Nozick effectively captures this dilemma: 'Individuals have rights, and there are things no person or group may do to them (without violating their rights). So strong and far-reaching are these rights that they raise the question of what, if anything, the state and its official may do.' Libertarian political philosophers have extensively debated this question, and many conclude that the answer is 'Nothing'.

^Friedman, David D. (2008). "libertarianism". The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. 2nd Edition. "Libertarians differ among themselves in the degree to which they rely on rights-based or consequentialist arguments and on how far they take their conclusions, ranging from classical liberals, who wish only to drastically reduce government, to anarcho-capitalists who would replace all useful government functions with private alternatives."

^The British Critic. p. 432. "The author's Latin verses, which are rather more intelligible than his English, mark him for a furious Libertarian (if we may coin such a term) and a zealous admirer of France, and her liberty, under Bonaparte; such liberty!"

^Seeley, John Robert (1878). Life and Times of Stein: Or Germany and Prussia in the Napoleonic Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3: 355.

^Marshall (2009). p. 641. "The word 'libertarian' has long been associated with anarchism, and has been used repeatedly throughout this work. The term originally denoted a person who upheld the doctrine of the freedom of the will; in this sense, Godwin was not a 'libertarian', but a 'necessitarian'. It came however to be applied to anyone who approved of liberty in general. In anarchist circles, it was first used by Joseph Déjacque as the title of his anarchist journal Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social published in New York in 1858. At the end of the last century, the anarchist Sebastien Faure took up the word, to stress the difference between anarchists and authoritarian socialists."

^"He called himself a "social poet," and published two volumes of heavily didactic verse—Lazaréennes and Les Pyrénées Nivelées. In New York, from 1858 to 1861, he edited an anarchist paper entitled Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social, in whose pages he printed as a serial his vision of the anarchist Utopia, entitled L'Humanisphére." George Woodcock. Anarchism: a history of libertarian ideas and movements. Meridian books. 1962. p. 280

^Colin Ward (2004), Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 62. "For a century, anarchists have used the word 'libertarian' as a synonym for 'anarchist', both as a noun and an adjective. The celebrated anarchist journal Le Libertaire was founded in 1896. However, much more recently the word has been appropriated by various American free-market philosophers..."

^Chomsky, Noam (February 23, 2002). "The Week Online Interviews Chomsky". Z Magazine. Z Communications. Retrieved 2011-11-21. The term libertarian as used in the US means something quite different from what it meant historically and still means in the rest of the world. Historically, the libertarian movement has been the anti-statist wing of the socialist movement. Socialist anarchism was libertarian socialism.

^Fernandez, Frank (2001). Cuban Anarchism. The History of a Movement. Sharp Press. p. 9. "Thus, in the United States, the once exceedingly useful term 'libertarian' has been hijacked by egotists who are in fact enemies of liberty in the full sense of the word."

^Rothbard, Murray N. (2009). The Betrayal of the American Right. Ludwig von Mises Institute. ISBN1610165012. One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, 'our side,' had captured a crucial word from the enemy... 'Libertarians'... had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over...

^Carlson (2012). p. 1007. "In contrast to the United States, where a right-libertarian sensibility dominates, western European nations with strong leftist political parties tend to see the emergence of left-libertarian parties, as detailed by Kent Redding and Jocelyn S. Viterna. According to them, these parties are united by their 'critique of the statist and bureaucratic tendencies of modern welfare states... inequality and environmental degradation produced by capitalist market economies.'"

^"'Libertarian' and 'libertarianism' are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of 'anarchy' and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, 'minimal statism' and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Rothbard and Nozick and their adoption of the words 'libertarian' and 'libertarianism'. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition." Goodway, David (2006). Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow: Left-Libertarian Thought and British Writers from William Morris to Colin Ward. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 4

^"It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism)." Newman, Saul (2010). The Politics of Postanarchism. Edinburgh University Press. p. 43. ISBN0748634959

^Marshall, Peter (2008). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Perennial. p. 565. "In fact, few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice, Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practising voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists."

^Sex-Pol stood for the German Society of Proletarian Sexual Politics. Danto writes that Reich offered a mixture of "psychoanalytic counseling, Marxist advice and contraceptives," and argued for a sexual permissiveness, including for young people and the unmarried, that unsettled other psychoanalysts and the political left. The clinics were immediately overcrowded by people seeking help. Danto, Elizabeth Ann (2007). Freud's Free Clinics: Psychoanalysis & Social Justice, 1918–1938, Columbia University Press, first published 2005., pp. 118–20, 137, 198, 208.

^Carlson (2012). p. 1007. "[Left-libertarians] disagree with right-libertarians with respect to property rights, arguing instead that individuals have no inherent right to natural resources. Namely, these resources must be treated as collective property that is made available on an egalitarian basis."

^Hallgrimsdottir & Benoit 2007; Roediger 2007a.
The term is not without its critics, as Roediger 2007b, p. 247, notes: "[T]he challenge to loose connections of wage (or white) slavery to chattel slavery was led by Frederick Douglass and other Black, often fugitive, abolitionists. Their challenge was mercilessly concrete. Douglass, who tried out speeches in work places before giving them in halls, was far from unable to speak to or hear white workers, but he and William Wells Brown did challenge metaphors regarding white slavery sharply. They noted, for example, that their escapes from slavery had left job openings and wondered if any white workers wanted to take the jobs."

^Nelson, John O. (1995). "That a Worker's Labour Cannot Be a Commodity". Philosophy. 70 (272): 158. JSTOR3751199. doi:10.1017/s0031819100065359.. This Marxist objection is what motivated Nelson's essay, which argues that labour is not, in fact, a commodity.

^Marx 1990, p. 1005. Emphasis in the original.
See also p. 716: "[T]he capitalist produces [and reproduces] the worker as a wage-labourer. This incessant reproduction, this perpetuation of the worker, is the absolutely necessary condition for capitalist production."

^Sanchez, Julian; Weigel, David. "Who Wrote Ron Paul's Newsletters?". Reason Foundation. Rothbard pointed to David Duke and Joseph McCarthy as models for an "Outreach to the Rednecks," which would fashion a broad libertarian/paleoconservative coalition by targeting the disaffected working and middle classes

^ abKymlicka, Will (2005). "libertarianism, left-". In Honderich, Ted. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. New York City: Oxford University Press. p. 516. ISBN978-0199264797. "'Left-libertarianism' is a new term for an old conception of justice, dating back to Grotius. It combines the libertarian assumption that each person possesses a natural right of self-ownership over his person with the egalitarian premiss that natural resources should be shared equally."

^"unlike other socialists, they tend to see (to various different degrees, depending on the thinker) to be skeptical of centralized state intervention as the solution to capitalist exploitation..." Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. p. 305

^"Therefore, rather than being an oxymoron, "libertarian socialism" indicates that true socialism must be libertarian and that a libertarian who is not a socialist is a phoney. As true socialists oppose wage labour, they must also oppose the state for the same reasons. Similarly, libertarians must oppose wage labour for the same reasons they must oppose the state." "I1. Isn´t libertarian socialism an oxymoron" inAn Anarchist FAQ

^Mendes, Silva. Socialismo Libertário ou Anarchismo Vol. 1 (1896): "Society should be free through mankind's spontaneous federative affiliation to life, based on the community of land and tools of the trade; meaning: Anarchy will be equality by abolition of private property (while retaining respect for personal property) and liberty by abolition of authority".

^"We therefore foresee a Society in which all activities will be coordinated, a structure that has, at the same time, sufficient flexibility to permit the greatest possible autonomy for social life, or for the life of each enterprise, and enough cohesiveness to prevent all disorder...In a well-organized society, all of these things must be systematically accomplished by means of parallel federations, vertically united at the highest levels, constituting one vast organism in which all economic functions will be performed in solidarity with all others and that will permanently preserve the necessary cohesion." Gaston Leval. Libertarian socialism: a practical outline".

^"...preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local, voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations-sometimes as a complement to and check on state power..."

^"LibSoc share with LibCap an aversion to any interference to freedom of thought, expression or choicce of lifestyle." Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. p. 305

^"What is implied by the term 'libertarian socialism'?: The idea that socialism is first and foremost about freedom and therefore about overcoming the domination, repression, and alienation that block the free flow of human creativity, thought, and action...An approach to socialism that incorporates cultural revolution, women's and children's liberation, and the critique and transformation of daily life, as well as the more traditional concerns of socialist politics. A politics that is completely revolutionary because it seeks to transform all of reality. We do not think that capturing the economy and the state lead automatically to the transformation of the rest of social being, nor do we equate liberation with changing our life-styles and our heads. Capitalism is a total system that invades all areas of life: socialism must be the overcoming of capitalist reality in its entirety, or it is nothing." "What is Libertarian Socialism?" by Ulli Diemer. Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of The Red Menace.

^"The Soviet Union Versus Socialism". chomsky.info. Retrieved 2015-11-22. Libertarian socialism, furthermore, does not limit its aims to democratic control by producers over production, but seeks to abolish all forms of domination and hierarchy in every aspect of social and personal life, an unending struggle, since progress in achieving a more just society will lead to new insight and understanding of forms of oppression that may be concealed in traditional practice and consciousness.

^"Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the "sociology of power") and the correlative duty to obey (as explred in the "philosophy of practical reason"). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations—by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power—and, practically, by its challenge to those "authoritative" powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. p. 1

^"Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations." Emma Goldman. "What it Really Stands for Anarchy" in Anarchism and Other Essays.

^Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left —follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism...Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx." Benjamin Tucker. Individual Liberty.

^Anarchist historian George Woodcock report of Mikhail Bakunin's anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (p. 9)...Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."

^"It is forgotten that the early defenders of commercial society like (Adam) Smith were as much concerned with criticising the associational blocks to mobile labour represented by guilds as they were to the activities of the state. The history of socialist thought includes a long associational and anti-statist tradition prior to the political victory of the Bolshevism in the east and varieties of Fabianism in the west. John O´Neil." The Market: Ethics, knowledge and politics. Routledge. 1998. p. 3

^Bromley, Kent (1906). "Preface". In Kropotkin, Peter. The Conquest of Bread. "considered early French utopian socialist Charles Fourier to be the founder of the libertarian branch of socialist thought, as opposed to the authoritarian socialist ideas of Babeuf and Buonarroti." New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

^McKay, Iain. An Anarchist FAQ. "(Benjamin) Tucker referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be "Anarchistic socialism."

^Armand, Émile. "Anarchist Individualism as a Life and Activity". "inwardly [the individualist anarchist] remains refractory—fatally refractory—morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)"

^Sabatini, Peter. "Peter Sabatini. Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy". "Within the United States of early to mid-19th century, there appeared an array of communal and 'utopian' counterculture groups (including the so-called free love movement). William Godwin's anarchism exerted an ideological influence on some of this, but more so the socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. After success of his British venture, Owen himself established a cooperative community within the United States at New Harmony, Indiana during 1825. One member of this commune was Josiah Warren (1798–1874), considered to be the first individualist anarchist."

^Kropotkin, Peter. "Anarchism" from the Encyclopædia Britannica. In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions

^Rocker, Rudolf (1949). Pioneers of American Freedom: Origin of Liberal and Radical Thought in America. New York: J. J. Little & Ives Company. p. 13. "It was the great service of liberal thinkers like Jefferson and Paine that they recognized the natural limitations of every form of government. That is why they did not want to see the state become a terrestrial Providence which in its infallibility would make on its own every decision, thereby not only blocking the road to higher forms of social development, but also crippling the natural sense of responsibility of the people which is the essential condition for every prosperous society."

^Tucker, Benjamin. Individual Liberty. New York: Vanguard Press. 1976I. p. 13. "The Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats. They believe that 'the best government is that which governs least,' and that that which governs least is no government at all."

^Scott, James C. (2012). Two Cheers for Anarchism: Six Easy Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaningful Work and Play. Princeton University Press. pp. 79–80. "At one end of an institutional continuum one can place the total institutions that routinely destroy the autonomy and initiative of their subjects. At the other end of this continuum lies, perhaps, some ideal version of Jeffersonian democracy composed of independent, self-reliant, self-respecting, landowning farmers, managers of their own small enterprises, answerable to themselves, free of debt, and more generally with no institutional reason for servility or deference. Such free-standing farmers, Jefferson thought, were the basis of a vigorous and independent public sphere where citizens could speak their mind without fear or favor. Somewhere in between these two poles lies the contemporary situation of most citizens of Western democracies: a relatively open public sphere but a quotidian institutional experience that is largely at cross purposes with the implicit assumptions behind this public sphere and encouraging and often rewarding caution, deference, servility, and conformity."

^Godwin himself attributed the first anarchist writing to Edmund Burke's A Vindication of Natural Society. "Most of the above arguments may be found much more at large in Burke's Vindication of Natural Society; a treatise in which the evils of the existing political institutions are displayed with incomparable force of reasoning and lustre of eloquence ..." – footnote, Ch. 2 Political Justice by William Godwin.

^"What do I mean by individualism? I mean by individualism the moral doctrine which, relying on no dogma, no tradition, no external determination, appeals only to the individual conscience."Mini-Manual of Individualism by Han Ryner

^"I do not admit anything except the existence of the individual, as a condition of his sovereignty. To say that the sovereignty of the individual is conditioned by Liberty is simply another way of saying that it is conditioned by itself.""Anarchism and the State" in Individual Liberty

^"inter alia: *George Richard Esenwein, The Spanish Civil War: a Modern Tragedy, 2005, p. 269. *Alexandre Skirda, Facing the Enemy: a History of Anarchist Organization from Proudhon to May 1968: 2002, p. 158. *Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism, 2010, p. 466. *Graham Kelsey". Anarchosyndicalism, Libertarian Communism, and the State: the CNT in Zaragoza and Aragon, 1930–1937. 1991: 250.

^José Peirats & Chris Ealham, The CNT in the Spanish Revolution, Volume 2: 2001, p. 76. "The anarchist youth movement had been founded soon after the birth of the Second Republic.... Later, they spread throughout the whole of Spain until they came to represent the third branch of the great libertarian family.... The FIJL had agreed upon the following statement of principles: '...This Association shall strive to invest young people with a libertarian conviction, as to equip them individually to struggle against authority in all its forms, whether in trade union matters or in ideological ones, so as to attain a libertarian social arrangement'"

^ ab"What was Ayn Rand's view of the libertarian movement?". Ayn Rand Institute. More specifically, I disapprove of, disagree with and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives, the so-called "hippies of the right," who attempt to snare the younger or more careless ones of my readers by claiming simultaneously to be followers of my philosophy and advocates of anarchism. ... libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication when that fits their purpose.

^Mayhew, Robert (2005). Ayn Rand Answers: The Best of Her Q & A. p. 72.

^Phillips-Fein, Kim (2009). Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan. New York: W. W. Norton. p. 27.

^Hazlitt, Henry (May 1, 2006) [March 1984]. "The Early History of FEE". The Freeman. FEE. The original officers were David M. Goodrich, chairman of the Board (he was then also chairman of the board of the B. F. Goodrich Company); Leonard Read, president; myself, vice-president; Fred R. Fairchild, professor of economics at Yale University, secretary; and Claude Robinson, president of the Opinion Research Institute, treasurer. [The] sixteen [original] trustees ... included H. W. Luhnow, president of William Volker & Company; A. C. Mattei, president of Honolulu Oil Corporation; William A. Paton of the University of Michigan; Charles White, president of the Republic Steel Corporation; Leo Wolman, professor of economics at Columbia; Donaldson Brown, former vice-president of General Motors; Jasper Crane, former vice-president of Du Pont; B. E. Hutchinson, chairman of the finance committee of Chrysler Corporation; Bill Matthews, publisher of the Arizona Star; W. C. Mullendore, president of the Southern California Edison Company.

^Rothbard, Murray N. (1965, 2000). "The Spooner-Tucker Doctrine: An Economist's View". Journal of Libertarian Studies. 20:1. p. 7. "There is, in the body of thought known as 'Austrian economics,' a scientific explanation of the workings of the free market (and of the consequences of government intervention in that market) which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their political and social Weltanschauung [worldview]".

^Fischler, Steven (Director); Sucher, Joel (Director) (1983). Anarchism in America (DVD). Pacific Street Films. "I was just amazed. When I read Emma Goldman, it was as though everything I had hoped that the Republican Party would stand for suddenly came out—crystalized—in this magnificently clear statement."

^Murray N. Rothbard, letter to David Bergland, June 5, 1986, qtd. Raimondo 263–64. Rothbard emphasized that this was relevant as a matter of strategy: the failure to pitch the libertarian message to Middle America, he wrote, might result in the loss of "the tight-assed majority."

^"Farrell provides a detailed history of the Catholic Workers and their founders Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin. He explains that their pacifism, anarchism, and commitment to the downtrodden were one of the important models and inspirations for the 60s. As Farrell puts it, "Catholic Workers identified the issues of the sixties before the Sixties began, and they offered models of protest long before the protest decade.""The Spirit of the Sixties: The Making of Postwar Radicalism" by James J. Farrell

^"Within the movements of the sixties there was much more receptivity to anarchism-in-fact than had existed in the movements of the thirties...But the movements of the sixties were driven by concerns that were more compatible with an expressive style of politics, with hostility to authority in general and state power in particular...By the late sixties, political protest was intertwined with cultural radicalism based on a critique of all authority and all hierarchies of power. Anarchism circulated within the movement along with other radical ideologies. The influence of anarchism was strongest among radical feminists, in the commune movement, and probably in the Weather Underground and elsewhere in the violent fringe of the anti-war movement." "Anarchism and the Anti-Globalization Movement" by Barbara Epstein

^Kiley, Jocelyn (25 August 2014). "In Search of Libertarians". Pew Research Center. "14% say the term libertarian describes them well; 77% of those know the definition (11% of total), while 23% do not (3% of total)."

^Brennan, Jason (2012). Libertarianism What Everyone Needs to Know Oxfrod University Press 2012. Oxford University Press. pp. 142–42. Is the Tea Party libertarian? Overall, the Tea Party movement is not libertarian, though it has many libertarian elements, and many libertarians are Tea Partiers. [...] They share the libertarian view that DC tends to be corrupt, and that Washington often promotes special interests at the expense of the common good. However, Tea Party members are predominantly populist, nationalist, social conservatives rather than libertarians. Polls indicate that most Tea Partiers believe government should have an active role in promoting traditional "family values" or conservative Judeo-Christian values. Many of them oppose free trade and open immigration. They tend to favor less government intervention in the domestic economy but more government intervention in international trade.

^Gairdner, William D. (2007) [1990]. The Trouble with Canada: A Citizen Speaks Out. Toronto: BPS Books. pp. 101–02. ISBN978-0-9784402-2-0. The first, we would call "libertarianism" today. Libertarians wanted to get all government out of people's lives. This movement is still very much alive today. In fact, in the United States, it is the third largest political party, and ran 125 candidates during the U.S. election of 1988.